Environmental Impacts Of COVID-19: Challenges And Opportunities For Sustainable Economy

The Impact of COVID-19 on Workers and the Environment

Covid-19 is a unique global challenge that cuts across all businesses, industries, countries, stakeholders, and sectors in particular to every person’s situation (1). As always, in the case of every crisis, some areas are hit harder compared to others. Beyond a reasonable doubt, COVID-19 is a severe crisis for this cohort, humans, therefore, hope and work in the direction of a sustainable future. To an extent, researchers have gathered insights on how COVID-19 affects economic sustainability, which is a better drive toward the bright side (1). In cases of difficulties, humanity is called upon to find ways and look up to propel itself to a brighter future.

After the outbreak of the pandemic, industries were subjected to closure/cease operations, to protect the health of workers and adherence to containment and mitigation policies (2). As a result, millions of workers across countries experienced a reduction or complete loss of income through unemployment. Where possible, some companies restructured their operations and allowed workers to operate remotely (2). However, many workers were unable to work remotely rendering them jobless. Consequently, such individuals were left with no option other than engaging in illegal operations to meet their needs. Such people in the rural areas would turn to the forest to exploit forest products and plants. They include business people who seek income by putting much pressure on forest resources through the production of charcoal (2). Such practices result in forest degradation and deforestation. Therefore, degradation and deforestation are considered negative impacts imposed by COVID-19 on the environment.

Covid-19 is a threatening health concern in humans and influences the environment in many ways. Among the environmental threats is an increase in domestic waste and hospital waste generation (3). Such wastes originate from rapid mask utilization, frequent change of protective clothing, and a large supply of medical equipment (3). In consequence, the disposal of such wastes causes environmental hazards which include atmospheric pollution (water, soil, and air) (3). As a result of limited to no foresight, medical wastes are disposed of more often and aggravate the impacts that medical wastes impart on the health of the human and ecological environment.

Studying the environmental impacts of COVID-19 is significant since the impacts imposed by the pandemic are seen. Before the outbreak of the pandemic, Chinese cities were known for high levels of smog and air pollution, months later after the outbreak of the pandemic the population and cities experienced an increase in blue skies (4). Additionally, at the start of 2020, the European space agency and NASA reported a decrease in the levels of  emissions (4). This was a result of halting the operations of factories, production, and transportation through lockdowns to contain the pandemic. Consequently, the global emissions dropped by 6% (200m tons decrease) when compared to the previous years (4). This shows a large-scale and sudden impact that is difficult to come by since industrial emission is responsible for 86% of worldwide  emissions (4). Nevertheless, the benefit of a positive decrease comes along with a large downturn in the economic status, thus impacting the lives of many individuals.

Increase in Domestic and Medical Waste due to COVID-19

The research is relevant to the community and businesses in that since production is closely tied to the economy and nothing would have been expected to result in such a drastic change in the environment within such a short time. Now, since the pandemic exists, measures had to be taken into account to contain the pandemic. In turn, the world witnessed the extent of the impact on the environment within the shortest time. after the lockdowns, energy consumption and economic activities are expected to return to normal. This will cause more emissions and energy consumption. Therefore, maybe by seeing such positive environmental impacts brought by COVID-19, industries, individuals, and the public sector would come up with alternative solutions and act on them for environmental safety as it was during the lockdowns.

When researching the impacts of COVID-19, four themes are considered namely changes in demand, changes in policies, shortage of food and products alongside the impacts that are imposed on the environment. Therefore, this paper major on the environmental impacts of the pandemic (COVD-19) on the world and sustainable economy.

According to the research done by Zambrano, the containment measures caused negative consequences to the environment as a result of the increased amount of both medical and domestic wastes that are harmful in most cases and have the potential of transmitting diseases if not treated appropriately (6). In his findings from the research in China, Wuhan, the hospitals generated more than 240 metric tons per day of medical waste as compared to 50 tones/day before the outbreak of the pandemic (6). This was nearly six times the normal, thus exposing the environment to risks of pollution. Additionally, the researcher also posed that the increased amount of environmental pollution as a result of no initiatives destined to recycle the generated medical wastes in the fear of spreading COVID-19 to those who recycle (6).

Similarly, in a preliminary case study assessment study of China by Wang and Su on the environmental impacts of COVID-19, the volume of carbon emissions during the lockdown dropped by 25% which was approximated to be less than 1 million tons compared to the emissions at the same time in the previous year. The findings by Paital on self-regenerating strategy on the environment found that the level of CO2 in Europe dropped by 390 million tons as a result of the lockdown (7); in the USA, the emissions of CO2 dropped to 40% due to lower traffic during the lockdown period (7).

Moreover, the study by Dantas reported that the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere resulting from illegal human activities increased by more than 50% in Barcelona during the lockdown period (8). Conversely, during the restriction period, the amount of CO2 from deforestation and illegal human activities was reduced by 45% in Malaysia (8). Consequently, this resulted in to drop in CO2 emissions to the environment thus imposing a negative impact on the environment.

From the selected articles there exists evidence of advantages and disadvantages of COVID-19 on the environment. The studies reported significant correlations of how CO2 emissions, waste generation, and engagement in illegal relates to COVID-19. Moreover, the studies found mixed results (negative and positive) impacts of COVID-19 on the environment. The studies had limitations since they focused on publications since the onset of the pandemic. Therefore, it was found that there is limited research on the impacts of COVID-19 on the environment. This research, therefore, focused on how the pandemic has improved global sustainability giving rise to the research question below.

Positive and Negative Environmental Impacts of COVID-19

How has COVID-19 improved global sustainability and the economy within our supply chains? To answer this question, the theme of environmental impacts was chosen. Alongside the theme were three research areas namely:

• How COVID-19 resulted in the production of more medical wastes than usual.
• How COVID-19 resulted in unemployment leading to increased legal operations (deforestation)
• How lockdown during the COVID-19 impacted reducing the emission of CO2.

 A linked Likert scale question was preferred for this research. A seven-point bipolar Likert scale was used to measure the occurrence frequency from where the respondents provided precise feedback with limited hindrances. This method was used because it measures the opposite forces that are agreed and disagree. Likert scale; The responses were assigned values from 1-to 7 based on the satisfaction. 1- STRONGLY DISAGREE, 2- DISAGREE, 3- SOMEWHAT DISAGREE, 4- EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE (NEITHER AGREE NOR DISAGREE), 5- SOMEWHAT AGREE, 6- AGREE, and 7- STRONGLY AGREE. Questionnaires; 13 participants were interviewed to rate their level of agreement on the following notions; (a) Medical waste is produced more times than usual (b) Unemployment rate leads to an increase in illegal operations (Deforesting) (c) Lockdown has significantly impacted on reducing CO2.

The use of the Likert scale in this research provided an accurate evaluation of the participant’s responses because of the wide extreme (addresses two opposing sides, agree and disagree) (9). The method also provided a better respondent’s reflection hence true evaluation. Additionally, the method provided the best solutions to the questionnaires. The questionnaires were important in this research since the questions were ego-related and sensitive. The method reduced time consumption since the respondents were provided with convenient options (9). Therefore, the two methods helped to generate quantitative data.

While using the Likert scale, it may be difficult to treat neutral opinions (9). Respondents may also decide to agree to the provided statements resulting in the acquiescence bias. While using questionnaires, the limitations include, that respondents may have a hidden agenda, feelings and emotions are hard to convey and some respondents may be unwilling to provide honest responses (9).

The alternative research method that would suit this study is the analysis of documents and records. In this case, organizational records that are already existing are analyzed over a given duration of time to generate data. The method would be significant because the data is readily available (9). Additionally, data tracking is made easy.

Based on the mode of occurrence, the mode of satisfaction of the respondents lies on the SOMEWHAT AGREE while responding to the generation of waste products. Similarly, the average response is SOMEWHAT AGREE. Additionally, similar results (SOMEWHAT AGREE) were seen on the average response of how lockdowns impact CO2 emissions. However, the mode of occurrence was EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE On the other hand, for the impacts of unemployment, the mode and mean of the respondents were found to be similar, EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE.

From the regression statistics above the R-square measures how much the three dependent variables are impacted/driven by the independent variable. It indicates that 58.51% of variations in the variables from the 7 observations. It means that 58.51 of the differences are attributed to the imposed impacts.

The significance (0.392115829) is greater than .05 implying that is not a strong regression.

The coefficient output results, the y-intercept is 2.639282736. Medical waste being produced more times than usual has a downward/negative (-0.32735613) Correlation with Lockdown having a significant impact on reducing CO2 having the strongest correlation.

The p-values are greater than .05 implying that the regression output results are insignificant.

From the pie charts showing proportions of the impacts, 4- EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE forms the largest proportion that is nearly the same in both cases.1- STRONGLY DISAGREE forms the smallest proportion.

From the bar graphs, the level of satisfaction is concentrated on the left side (negative skewness) on the impacts of medical wastes. Conversely, the level of satisfaction is concentrated on the right side (positive skewness) when considering the impacts imposed by unemployment. However, the results on the impacts of lockdown showed normal distribution. 

After going through the qualitative data analysis, literature review, and quantitative data analysis of this research, the research question is worthwhile since it provides results that can be used for improvements in the feature.

For companies, it would be suggested that strategies and interventions implementations within such institutions should consider the issues and constraints that are identified in this research.

The research in this paper may not be sufficient enough, therefore companies should adopt it alongside planning for further research. Hence, companies should consider the following recommendations.

1. Waste management plans should be improved to manage the millions of tons of medical waste from COVID-19 responses.
2. Upon return to normal operations, strict laws and guidelines should be provided to minimize illegal activities such as deforestation.
3. Control equipment with longer life should be used to manage CO2 emissions. 

McBride K, Brown K, Fisher O, Steffens D, Yeo D, Koh C. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical services: early experiences at a nominated COVID-19 center. ANZ Journal of Surgery. 2020 Apr 7;

Nayak P, Mishra V, Singh M, Tambuwala MM. Impacts and consequences of COVID-19 epidemic on global economy. Coronaviruses. 2020 Sep 5;01.

Andeobu L, Wibowo S, Grandhi S. Medical Waste from COVID-19 Pandemic—A Systematic Review of Management and Environmental Impacts in Australia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022 Jan 26;19(3):1381.

Sabelli C. How COVID-19 will impact CO2 emissions in Italy. Nature Italy. 2021 Sep 30;

Singh M, Karimi N, Ng KTW, Mensah D, Stilling D, Adusei K. Hospital waste generation during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic: a case study in Delhi. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2022 Mar 3;

Manuel A. Z-M, Ruano MA, Sanchez-Alcalde L. Indirect effects of COVID-19 on the environment. Science of The Total Environment [Internet]. 2020 Aug;728(728):138813. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720323305

Paital B. Nurture to nature via COVID-19, a self-regenerating environmental strategy of environment in global context. Science of The Total Environment. 2020 Apr;139088.

Working from Home and Other Home Activities during a COVID-19 Lockdown. Archives of Health Science. 2021 Apr 1;1–7.

Du?a A, Frunzaru V. The Visual Analogue Scale. An Alternative to the Likert Type Response Scales. An Alternative to the Likert Type Response Scales. International Review of Social Research. 2019 Feb 1;1(1):91–103.

Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:

Turnitin Report

Formatting

Title Page

Citation

Outline

Place an Order